That has to be frustrating and wasteful of paper and time. It would be to me. I would seriously consider adding some neutral density and/or getting a lower-output lamp. Then you won't need to deal in fractions of seconds.

No, it is no more difficult dealing with fractions of a second than it is seconds. My timer has controls for both and is very accurate. If the print needs a correction I simply add or subtract fractions of a second as needed as I would seconds, based on experience. It is just as easy.

RPC

06-22-2011, 04:40 PM

Ken N

I'll never set foot in a darkroom again without my RH Designs gear. It's THAT good. Metronome? Yeah, Saint Adams used one--but he started out before there was electricity.

06-22-2011, 08:13 PM

Nicholas Lindan

The question isn't "Do I need a timer?", but "Would a timer make my time in the darkroom more enjoyable and productive?"

06-22-2011, 09:26 PM

Existing Light

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicholas Lindan

The question isn't "Do I need a timer?", but "Would a timer make my time in the darkroom more enjoyable and productive?"

Sometimes after I open the aperture on my enlarger lens all the way open to focus, I forget to stop it back down. That makes my darkroom times less productive and enjoyable. (but I do that waaaaay less than I used to)

Sometimes when counting the seconds while exposing or developing my print, I lose count and either trash the print or just guestimate what second I should be on. Sometimes I screw up so badly I end up with a print that's too bad even for my low standards; that makes my darkroom time less enjoyable and productive

If I had a timer, I'd probably ocassionally set it wrong or lose track of time with it somehow*. That would make my darkroom time less productive and enjoyable.

I'm being a little cantankerous here, but I think a timer would be nice, and I wouldnt turn down a good deal if I found one and actually had a bit of spare money.

I have a surge protector that my lamp and enlarger plug in to. It sits on a table (the surge protector) next to the enlarger and is plugged in an outlet under the table. When I'm ready to expose a sheet, I flip the switch on the surge protector and the enlarger light comes on. I count the seconds until I get to however many it takes to properly expose the paper (when I contact print, there's enough light for me to see the clock as a guide if I lose count. counting 20 seconds is so easy I can do it 99% of the time without screwing up).

When developing, I just listen and count two minutes, which really isnt too hard if I concentrate. I might be more productive with a timer, but I'm a bit of a clutz, so that's just something else for me to try not to break or set wrong. :D

*at the school darkroom, we have enlarger timers for each enlarger. There's a Gralab timer on a table at the end of the sink. We usually set that to 59:59 minutes and let it run until it stops and then reset it. It's pretty easy even for beginners (at least at UAH) to watch the timer for a few minutes to make sure the print is fully developed and fixed. However, some uf us (me included) have got to talking to each other without realizing the paper has been in the developer for 5 minutes :D

06-24-2011, 10:37 PM

Newt_on_Swings

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPC

With my enlarger, when I make small prints (5x7 or smaller), the exposure time is often less than 5 or 6 seconds, often requiring tenths of a second accuracy to get exposure just right. That would be difficult without my timer.

RPC

I was making a few post cards last night, same problem. My gralab timer for an exposure of 4 seconds on two consecutive prints, resulted in one perfect, and one with shadows just a bit too dark. Hard to get perfect consistency with those short times without a nice timer.

06-24-2011, 10:48 PM

Bill Burk

Ahh, but his metronome was a _compensating_ metronome.

06-24-2011, 11:06 PM

Hikari

A good time that will do tenths of a second is a must. If your exposure is 6 seconds, how do you change it by 10%. Counting in your head is unreliable and not repeatable.

06-24-2011, 11:10 PM

tkamiya

Before I answered this thread for the first time, I kind of wondered why OP was asking this question. To me, a timer is just a standard equipment. I have printed without one in the past, it still is something that belongs in a/my darkroom.

I wonder if OP have some darkroom experience already or if he/she is just setting one up and evaluating his/her options? Or, is this a question of more advanced timer and if he/she is wondering it is a better idea??

Would someone PLEASE invent a genderless pronoun?

06-24-2011, 11:41 PM

tomalophicon

Quote:

Originally Posted by tkamiya

Before I answered this thread for the first time, I kind of wondered why OP was asking this question. To me, a timer is just a standard equipment. I have printed without one in the past, it still is something that belongs in a/my darkroom.

I wonder if OP have some darkroom experience already or if he/she is just setting one up and evaluating his/her options? Or, is this a question of more advanced timer and if he/she is wondering it is a better idea??

Would someone PLEASE invent a genderless pronoun?

I say they.

06-25-2011, 12:59 AM

ic-racer

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlbertZeroK

Okay, i get it, I can make the same print again and again with a timer, but other than that, why should I have one?

Have you ever printed?

If you are Lith Printing, you don't need one, because you determine the 'snatch point' on the fly in the developer and each print is unique.

Otherwise, it is impossible to establish an exposure time for your print without a method of keeping time. Of course, counting "one-one-thousand", etc is a method of keeping time.